It's contrary to the facts. It's contrary to the facts that apply to this particular offender and similarly situated offenders.
As I said, the least restrictive test is what really had currency with respect to offenders who were found not criminally responsible. It just doesn't apply to these kinds of offenders. As I say, it's fine if you apply it to the majority of offenders who have fixed sentences. They're going to get out regardless, but it just has no application and it's completely disconnected from the punishment principles of sentencing.
If one looks at section 718 of the Criminal Code, in a case like Paul Bernardo, the pre-eminent principle is punishment, and this is completely inconsistent with those sentencing principles. It has to be changed.